Raises ordered for 9 court workers

upside down wrote:

I can't imagine any state constitution giving judges the right to order spending, in essense raising taxes. If the county doesn't want to fund these positions then its up to the judge to preform those duties. If you can't find a judge to preform those duties then you raise his salary or hire people to help. Thats how it should work. Let the market decide.
SCREW THESE JUDGES THAT THINK THEY CAN COMMAND ANYTHING THEY WANT.

You are a confused lil' squirrel, aren't you?

uninformed

"confused" or "uninformed" doesn't begin to describe the depth of this person's ignorance. Nor could this possibly be explained by public schooling...this person exemplifies an attitude of "me first, last and only" that seems to pervade these pages when it comes to anything related to government spending. If we had a new story that because of clerical error in one of these courts a criminal was released and committed a particularly nasty crime like murder or kidnapping and rape, this clown would be all over the courts for hiring incompetent people. When the judges try to set pay scales that would allow them to hire competent people, people like this complain about tax dollars being spent...

They can't have it both ways...they can't complain about incompetent government workers and then refuse to be taxed so that government can hire qualified people. Qualified people deserve, and demand, appropriate compensation.

This really boils down to an Indiana Constitutional issue as well as a separation of powers. The Indiana Constitution requires courts in every county. An obvious need is to have those courts properly funded. Without funding, the courts really can't exist in the real world.

The Weatherman wrote:

This really boils down to an Indiana Constitutional issue as well as a separation of powers. The Indiana Constitution requires courts in every county. An obvious need is to have those courts properly funded. Without funding, the courts really can't exist in the real world.

I have to agree with the first poster. The notion that judges have the power to order the legislative and executive branches is completely without legal foundation. While I agree their salaries should be increased, judges don't have the power to do it.

how about the Indiana Supreme Court setting a minimum wage of $30K for everyone?

as a former court reporter for Marion County, I applaud the judges supporting their employees. I, for one, did not get that support from our judges. New court reporters were coming in at $10,000 above my salary, which I had been a court reporter for close to eight years. I was told that it was too bad and to, essentially, grin and bear it. I had not gotten a raise in four years, and it is sad that Marion County can give raises to its prosecutors, public defenders, and judges, but can't give raises to the people that work in the courts, who deserve it.

I think you missed the point. The question is not whether you and other court workers deserve more pay.(You certainly do.) The question is whether courts have the authority to order another branch of government to pay government employees more money.(Clearly they do not.)

This is overdue wrote:

as a former court reporter for Marion County, I applaud the judges supporting their employees. I, for one, did not get that support from our judges. New court reporters were coming in at $10,000 above my salary, which I had been a court reporter for close to eight years. I was told that it was too bad and to, essentially, grin and bear it. I had not gotten a raise in four years, and it is sad that Marion County can give raises to its prosecutors, public defenders, and judges, but can't give raises to the people that work in the courts, who deserve it.

hannibal wrote:

how about the Indiana Supreme Court setting a minimum wage of $30K for everyone?

Gee, how socialistic of you. Not real fond of democratic government are you?

The governor and the legislature need to tell the ISC to take a flying leap. The court employees may need, or even deserve, higher salaries but there is no way these Judges have the right to tell the county what they have to pay their employees. When are the other 2 branches of government going to say enough is enough when it comes to these judicial fiefdoms?

I agree. The problem though is that any dispute between the other branches and the courts is decided by the courts.

Tokin42 wrote:

The governor and the legislature need to tell the ISC to take a flying leap. The court employees may need, or even deserve, higher salaries but there is no way these Judges have the right to tell the county what they have to pay their employees. When are the other 2 branches of government going to say enough is enough when it comes to these judicial fiefdoms?

These damm judges think they are above all. They shouldnt , if they do, have the power to order a pay raise.
They are no one special. They may think they are. They're just lowlife lawyers that couldnt catch the ambulance. So now they are feeding at the public grub bucket.

Fred, you should learn some history before you go around making mistaken pronouncements - judicial mandates like this aren't new; they've been around for at least 100 years. They're fundamental to having a system with three distinct branches.

Also, if you read the papers in Crawfordsville (which I don't think the star did...), the county commissioners are very happy with the supreme court's order, since it reduced the raises for the court staff from what the trial court wanted to something much closer to what the commissioners had offered. It also cut back on the attorney fees.

Where do I order my raise?

Kay wrote:

Where do I order my raise?

I suggest from Louisville Ladder!

:-D

Fred Flintstone wrote:

I think you missed the point. The question is not whether you and other court workers deserve more pay.(You certainly do.) The question is whether courts have the authority to order another branch of government to pay government employees more money.(Clearly they do not.)
<quoted text>

what about unions? Haven't they done in the past what the judges did?

I kind of liked what Buford Pusser did to his Judge when he didn't like his corrupt decisions.

Sheriff Buford found out it was within his powers to assign the Judge's chambers. Ah-ha! Buford made arrangements for his favorite Judge to have any seat right in the Men's Restroom.

wrong wrote:

<quoted text>
what about unions? Haven't they done in the past what the judges did?

What? Unions have no authority to command a raise. They can pressure or lobby management for one, but not command like in this case.

Peter wrote:

Fred, you should learn some history before you go around making mistaken pronouncements - judicial mandates like this aren't new; they've been around for at least 100 years. They're fundamental to having a system with three distinct branches.
Also, if you read the papers in Crawfordsville (which I don't think the star did...), the county commissioners are very happy with the supreme court's order, since it reduced the raises for the court staff from what the trial court wanted to something much closer to what the commissioners had offered. It also cut back on the attorney fees.

But it sets bad precedent.